Woodruff v. Di Paolo

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Woodruff v. Di Paolo

187 A. 135, 14 N.J. Misc. 786, 1936 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 257

DecidedOctober 9, 1936

StatusPublished

This text of 187 A. 135 (Woodruff v. Di Paolo) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Woodruff v. Di Paolo, 187 A. 135, 14 N.J. Misc. 786, 1936 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 257 (N.J. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

There was evidence tending to establish plaintiff’s right to recover the fees, costs and disbursements set forth in the [787]*787state of demand; and the judgment must therefore be affirmed.

There was no basis for the claim made by defendant that he was denied the right to argue the factual questions at the conclusion of the taking of the proofs. While the judge indicated he would “not hear argument,” the right was not asserted by defendant, nor was the question raised by an appropriate exception.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

There was evidence tending to establish plaintiff’s right to recover the fees, costs and disbursements set forth in the [787]*787state of demand; and the judgment must therefore be affirmed.

There was no basis for the claim made by defendant that he was denied the right to argue the factual questions at the conclusion of the taking of the proofs. While the judge indicated he would “not hear argument,” the right was not asserted by defendant, nor was the question raised by an appropriate exception.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

187 A. 135, 14 N.J. Misc. 786, 1936 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 257, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/woodruff-v-di-paolo-nj-1936.